[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Given your choice
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum


Author Poll
joec32033
Posts: 10631
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #583
USA
Given your choice would you draft a solid low ceiling but a very good chance of being solid, productive NBA players (like Battier, Troy Murphy, Jarrett Jack, Caron Butler, Emeka Ok4) or would you prefer a boom or bust single prospect than can be great or will fall through the floor (such as a Dwight Howard, Marvin Williams, Olowakandi, Kwame Brown)
10 votes
76.92%
Solid player
3 votes
23.08%
Boom or Bust prospect


« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
joec32033
Posts: 30631
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #583
USA
5/29/2006  10:59 PM
I personally think it would depend on the type of draft (this is a weak draft for example) but I would normally pick the solid NBA player over the boom or bust prospect if I had ANY questions about the boom or bust prospect's chances in the NBA.
~You can't run from who you are.~
AUTOADVERT
BlueSeats
Posts: 27272
Alba Posts: 41
Joined: 11/6/2005
Member: #1024
5/29/2006  11:24 PM
That's a serious disrespect of Dwight Howard, IMO. I'd say his likelihood of success is as good as almost any bigman in the game right now.
Solace
Posts: 30002
Alba Posts: 20
Joined: 10/30/2003
Member: #479
USA
5/29/2006  11:29 PM
I think it's a disrespect for a few players. Emeka Okafor still has a pretty high ceiling, I'd say.

Ignoring the examples, though, it's a tough call. For a big man, I'm more willing to take the risk than for a guard. With our needs, I'd probably say take the risk, since we're 3 to 5 years away from being good again anyway.
Wishing everyone well. I enjoyed posting here for a while, but as I matured I realized this forum isn't for me. We all evolve. Thanks for the memories everyone.
djsunyc
Posts: 44929
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
5/29/2006  11:33 PM
i think that if you had the #1 pick in an expansion draft, it would go to lbj. but the next two would be wade and howard. (not sure about the order tho)
EwingsGlass
Posts: 27716
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 4/29/2005
Member: #893
USA
5/30/2006  12:23 AM
I'd like to believe that a good organization increases the percentage chances of turning the boom/bust players into the boom rather than the bust. That said, you have to know your organization. If we are talking about a big man, I want the riskier higher ceiling player because I believe Mark Aguirre is the best big man coach in the game. If we are talking SF, I want low ceiling productive because I don't think anybody in the organization even knows what to do with the SF position, hence the overabundance of guards and the lack of SFs. Finally, if we are talking guards, well, there seems to be a preference for high risk, high ceiling players based upon what we have traded for and drafted. That said, I am not sure that our org knows what to do with them to train them properly. I have faith in LB but I am not sure whether he trains Guards (ike Chauncey) or whether they train him (AI) or whether they both train wreck (Marbury). Lately, it seems the like a train wreck.
You know I gonna spin wit it
joec32033
Posts: 30631
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #583
USA
5/30/2006  5:54 AM
Symantics are symantics and in this case of my examples it is a matter of opinion. If my examples are bad in your opinion, ignore the examples. You guys can figure out the basis of my question.

Guys it is absolutely not a disrespect at all. AS examples in the "boom or bust" area I had to use guys who were exactly that WHEN they were drafted. Howard is an example of a Boom. He made it. Marvin we are still waiting on, and the other two or busts.

As for Ok4, it was a pretty solid opinion that his cieling was not as high as Howard's. He had a lower ceiling that it was said he would reach faster because his game was more NBA ready. This is not a disrespect to any player but a reflection of what they're projections were at the time of the draft.

[Edited by - joec32033 on 05-30-2006 05:56 AM]
~You can't run from who you are.~
DarkKnicks
Posts: 21064
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 3/29/2005
Member: #882
Spain
5/30/2006  8:14 AM
joec32033, I think Olowokandi was never a prospect, he was a monster in college.
Edit: sorry, I hadn't read your last post.

[Edited by - DarkKnicks on 05-30-2006 08:14 AM]
Solace
Posts: 30002
Alba Posts: 20
Joined: 10/30/2003
Member: #479
USA
5/30/2006  8:23 AM
Okafor could easily be a 20 and 10 player within a few years. So far he hasn't done anything unexpected either. He went #2 overall and they had considered taking him #1 overall. Okafor isn't a low ceiling pick.
Wishing everyone well. I enjoyed posting here for a while, but as I matured I realized this forum isn't for me. We all evolve. Thanks for the memories everyone.
joec32033
Posts: 30631
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #583
USA
5/30/2006  8:58 AM
Posted by Solace:

Okafor could easily be a 20 and 10 player within a few years. So far he hasn't done anything unexpected either. He went #2 overall and they had considered taking him #1 overall. Okafor isn't a low ceiling pick.

Bro that was the big thing when Orlando had to choose between them. Dwight had superstar potential to get alot better after a little while, while Emeka was viewed as having a lower ceiling but was ready now.
~You can't run from who you are.~
Solace
Posts: 30002
Alba Posts: 20
Joined: 10/30/2003
Member: #479
USA
5/30/2006  9:01 AM
Posted by joec32033:
Posted by Solace:

Okafor could easily be a 20 and 10 player within a few years. So far he hasn't done anything unexpected either. He went #2 overall and they had considered taking him #1 overall. Okafor isn't a low ceiling pick.

Bro that was the big thing when Orlando had to choose between them. Dwight had superstar potential to get alot better after a little while, while Emeka was viewed as having a lower ceiling but was ready now.

No argument that Howard was considered to have the higher ceiling. I guess it's in the phrasing. You said "solid low ceiling", when talking about Okafor and grouped him with a bunch of low-risk players, but guys who aren't in the same class as Okafor. I guess maybe if you had phrased it with the comparison of what choices you could make (e.g.: safe pick Okafor vs. higher ceiling pick Howard, etc...)

At any rate, I see what you were getting at.
Wishing everyone well. I enjoyed posting here for a while, but as I matured I realized this forum isn't for me. We all evolve. Thanks for the memories everyone.
gr33d
Posts: 20788
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 2/19/2006
Member: #1097
USA
5/30/2006  9:17 AM
I think based on our current draft position (20 & 29), we go for boom (at least with one of the picks).

My question would be, how could that pick address our biggest need? I hear people talking about a tough, defensive-minded rebounder to put next to Curry. Ok, not Channing but I think he's better then what we've seen thus far. And Butler did a nice job with the minutes he was given. I hear point guard talk, when we have 4 guys that already play the position (maybe not well, but that's another debate).

Couldn't we use a small forward?
"If you ain't first, you're last" - Ricky Bobby
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
5/30/2006  12:06 PM
we need someone w/good fundamentals who knows how to play the game who won't be too much of a project at this point... we have to build a solid nucleus.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
Pharzeone
Posts: 32183
Alba Posts: 14
Joined: 2/11/2005
Member: #871
5/30/2006  12:25 PM
I don't have a problem with alternating every year. Are if you have multiple picks doing it the same year. Depending on your situation too. Playoff teams usually have the luxury to take gambles on risker projects than lottery teams. Sometimes it doesn't work out either way so it is all a crap shoot. NJ for example took Yinka Dare, a high risk/high reward guy and then the next year took the so call sure thing, Ed O'Bannon. Crap shoot.
I don't like to play bad rookies , I like to play good rookies - Mike D'Antoni
joec32033
Posts: 30631
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #583
USA
5/31/2006  12:27 AM
Posted by Solace:
Posted by joec32033:
Posted by Solace:

Okafor could easily be a 20 and 10 player within a few years. So far he hasn't done anything unexpected either. He went #2 overall and they had considered taking him #1 overall. Okafor isn't a low ceiling pick.

Bro that was the big thing when Orlando had to choose between them. Dwight had superstar potential to get alot better after a little while, while Emeka was viewed as having a lower ceiling but was ready now.

No argument that Howard was considered to have the higher ceiling. I guess it's in the phrasing. You said "solid low ceiling", when talking about Okafor and grouped him with a bunch of low-risk players, but guys who aren't in the same class as Okafor. I guess maybe if you had phrased it with the comparison of what choices you could make (e.g.: safe pick Okafor vs. higher ceiling pick Howard, etc...)

At any rate, I see what you were getting at.

Yeah, could've worded it a little better but it was crystal clear to me when I wrote it, but I can see the confusion.
~You can't run from who you are.~
Solace
Posts: 30002
Alba Posts: 20
Joined: 10/30/2003
Member: #479
USA
5/31/2006  7:21 AM
Posted by joec32033:
Posted by Solace:
Posted by joec32033:
Posted by Solace:

Okafor could easily be a 20 and 10 player within a few years. So far he hasn't done anything unexpected either. He went #2 overall and they had considered taking him #1 overall. Okafor isn't a low ceiling pick.

Bro that was the big thing when Orlando had to choose between them. Dwight had superstar potential to get alot better after a little while, while Emeka was viewed as having a lower ceiling but was ready now.

No argument that Howard was considered to have the higher ceiling. I guess it's in the phrasing. You said "solid low ceiling", when talking about Okafor and grouped him with a bunch of low-risk players, but guys who aren't in the same class as Okafor. I guess maybe if you had phrased it with the comparison of what choices you could make (e.g.: safe pick Okafor vs. higher ceiling pick Howard, etc...)

At any rate, I see what you were getting at.

Yeah, could've worded it a little better but it was crystal clear to me when I wrote it, but I can see the confusion.

I know I can be a pain in the ass when picking out particulars of semantics. I learned it from Bonn. Tee hee.
Wishing everyone well. I enjoyed posting here for a while, but as I matured I realized this forum isn't for me. We all evolve. Thanks for the memories everyone.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
5/31/2006  7:24 AM
LOL! I was gonna say "You learned from the best!" but I'm not sure that would be a compliment in this case!
« Reply To Topic
Given your choice
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy